Biomarkers and proof of concept

Methods and Findings in Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology

Volumn 24, Issue SUPPL. C, 2002, Pages 35-40

  Ferber, Georg ^a  

^a Novartis Pharma AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALGESIC AGENT; BIOLOGICAL MARKER; NEUROLEPTIC AGENT;

BAYES THEOREM; CONFERENCE PAPER; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG MECHANISM; DRUG RESEARCH; HUMAN; CLINICAL TRIAL; METHODOLOGY; PHARMACEUTICS; REVIEW; STATISTICS;

BAYES THEOREM; BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; CLINICAL TRIALS; HUMANS; TECHNOLOGY, PHARMACEUTICAL;

EID: 0036448183     PISSN: 03790355     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (10)

1. Senn, S. Some statistical issues in project prioritization in the pharmaceutical industry. Stats Med 1996. 15: 2669-702.
2. Senn, S. Statistical Issues in Drug Development. Wiley: Chichester 1997.
3. Atkinson et al. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: Preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001, 69: 89-95.
4. Fleming, T.R., DeMets, D.L. Surrogate end points in clinical trials: Are we being misled? Ann Intern Med 1996. 125: 605-13.
5. Abt, K. Planning controlled clinical trials on the basis of descriptive data analysis. Stat Med 1991. 10: 777-95.
6. Wellek, S. Einführung in die statistische methodik von äquivalenzstudien. Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie in Medizin und Biometrie 1995. 26: 81-106.
7. Röhmel, J. Therapeutic equivalence investigations: Statistical considerations. Stat Med 1998, 17: 1703-14.
8. Spiegelhalter, D.J., Freedman, L.S., Parmar, M.K.B. Bayesian approaches to randomized trials (with discussion). J Royal Stat Soc Series A 1994, 157: 357-416.
9. Stallard, N., Thall, P.F., Whitehead, J. Decision theoretic design for phase II clinical trials with multiple outcome. Biometrics 1999, 55: 971-7.
10. Fink, M. Pharmacoelectroencephalography: A Note on its History. Neuropsychobiology 1984, 12: 173-8.